Truth behind Chandragupta and Alexander meeting

When it comes to the history of Chandragupta Maurya, most of our history books talk about a meeting where Chandragupta Maurya met Alexander. In this video, we will analyse the evidence about this meeting and see how true this whole event is.
Reference:-
1. Chandragupta Maurya And His Times by R K Mookerji.
2. The Age of Imperial Unity
3. The invasion of India by Alexander the Great by J W Mcrindle
Credits:-
Inputs on the script by Pushkar Chaudhary.
Spotify
open.spotify.com/show/6NJcBvG...
Follow me on Twitter
/ jayvtweets
Follow me on Goodreads
/ jay-vardhan
Maps Images used in the video are made by me and are subject to copyright.
Images are sourced from :-
commons.wikimedia.org/

[@vg2812]

Can you please make video about the historical aspects of mahabharata?

[@chitragatha-anshudeepdhusi5752]

No please. I don't want him to be condemned as a sanghi by leftists and vaami by rightists. Indian people are turned into most stupid race ever now a days.

[@user-cl9bd1tz3b]

1,200 BCE-1,000 BCE = Mahabharata war possible timeline. 1 Akshauhini = 109,350 according to veda vyasa and there were total of 18 Akshauhini's. Let's take average of 100,000 soldiers People who participated in war =1.8 million. Death toll possibly 1.5 Million people. People who fleed or got saved after the main characters of war died = 300,000 people. Population of India at that time = 13 million+ Aftermath of war : Trade got affected heavily, gender imbalance human resource shortage, agricultural crisis and mother's and kids source of income got finished direct impact. Recovery took 500-600 years until Urbanisation in 700-600 BCE

[@vg2812]

@@user-cl9bd1tz3b but do you seriously think the figures mentioned in mahabharata are actually accurate and not exaggerated? We still need solid evidence to confirm that number. The war happened for sure, there were a lotta deaths and a lotta resources lost but we need to find evidence that can explain the figures like mass graves etc. According to Bandhayana, unmarried women should not be cremated. The sinauli burials of a women soldier reflects this. Most of the soldiers who died in the war would have been cremated which forces us to look for evidence elsewhere.

[@user-cl9bd1tz3b]

@@vg2812 well yes this one is not exaggerated the population of Harappan civilization around 1,900 BCE was 6 Million residents it will take 500 years to double that number around 1,400 BCE you will have population 12 million+ give or take 200 more years and that's it you have 1,200 BCE as far as Mahabharata war is concerned well Veda vyasa do mention that a Akshauhini contains 109,350 troops but it doesn't accounts whether each of those Akshauhini were having exactly counted 109,350 troops which means there could be difference of few thousand troops take an average of 100,000 troops now as far as what you said WHETHER this figure was exaggerated or not well Yadavas had civil war it's common to happen if your economy is crippled and you have shortage of men and it went on throughout India trade was reduced financial resources of janapads were being used to match the expenses of wars and millions of poverty stricken women and their children these all carry the aftermath of Mahabharata war that's why we don't see any Urbanization in India till 600 BCE or until 1,000 BCE India should be Urbanized given the fact that 900 years passed since people were migrating from Harappa and nearby Regions so something was there which took so long for Urbanisation to start so late roughly ~1,500 years.

[@user-cl9bd1tz3b]

@@vg2812 well it's hard to pin point the location where Mahabharata happened and if known then one can excavate to see mass graves but I don't think so it will help because in India you burn people with fire you have no choice left rather then burning 1.2-1.5 million dead bodies or else it will smell a lot so I think they were burnt but such mass burning means that it would be impossible for even the bones to survive so long till today even if say 20 percent of those bones survive you couldn't extract the DNA from them because Carbon has already degraded a lot from bones while burning and 3,200 years of degradation so if you are lucky then it's fine you can get it, now that question if let's say nothing of this war has happened in history and it's just all a literature thing which got very famous in early times which was a esoteric literature on how human psychology works then nobody can do anything for that. 😂😂😂 but until now there haven't been any solid evidence to support Mahabharata except dwarka which dates back to same period and sunken.

[@harrypotter6505]

Amazing style of creating your videos, no excessive cuts and keeping your eyes on the audience... Please keep this up, I appreciate your presentation style a lot!

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thank you!

[@shekharb2981]

Thanks for very good description of the truth than untrue noises of many. Seems that archeology always talks truth & scientific evidence,while those of historians only put up likely links to combine two or three events to make a story.

[@Worldcitizen7777]

Can you make video on ancient Indian style of cloths and wearing clothes which type of clothes they wear from Harrapan to Medieval era

[@thewholesomeZaman]

Spoiler alert, it wasn't like we're used to seeing in BR Chopra's Mahabharat or RNS Ramayana, the bare bodies with only one cloth roped around above the waist is inaccurate depiction too and there were a heckload of awesome looking Turbans

[@raginisingh2251]

V. Informative video

[@venkateshu8715]

Superb

[@vedicarya7]

Lool nd here trp dwellers be making whole drama serial of chandragupta meeting Alexander

[@Chahaman_Harshit_00]

Actually, here the Sandrocottos(whomever he may be) asked Alex, to attack Prachyas(Eastners) and also told him he(the king there) was unpopular among the masses due to his low birth, hence it is right time to attack his empire. But if we consider, the Mudrarakshasa, it mentions that Chandragupta Maurya took help of Northwestern tribes while sacking Pataliputra, this includes, Kambhojas, Sakas, Yavanas, etc. But It may point to Ionians(if Mauryas existed before Alex) central Asian greeks before Alexander, because they were present since the times of Dionysis, in thee country adjoing Bahalika.

[@akk7791]

Nice 👍

[@Learnwithpksahoo]

1. Please make a video on Saraswati river. 2. When you make any video please keep in mind the Saraswati river. You may find new information 3. I love your work

[@loduking2101]

wow! 6 videos in this month! is this your highest?

[@linguistme6870]

Your Nandrum substitution is actually corruption of account as in earlier versions published before 1890s it is Alexandrum and only in later versions do we see Nandrum so in my eyes Nandrum is an interpolation .

[@Kalki3710]

From Nowhere else, Andrakotas sounds like Chandragupta in Greek phonetics. Sandrakotus sounds like Chandragupta. Just like Amichottus sounds, Amitragath/ Bindusara

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

Sandrocottus is a Greek name and Androcottus wasits Latin corruption.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

There is no such corruption. Androcottus is mentioned in a Greek sources. Infact, the term Sandrakottos appears both in Greek and Latin sources.

[@Kalki3710]

@@JayVardhanSingh Thanks for clarifying bro.

[@knowledge-21234]

It sound like samudragupta more

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

@@knowledge-21234 Sandrocottus is for Chandragupta It evolved from Chandragupta to Sandrocoptus to Sandrocottus. Sandrocottus predesucessor was Agrammes which is a Greek corruption of Sanskrit Augrasainya( son of Ugrasena) ,Ugrasena was the personal name of Mahapadma Nanda

[@user-kv2hp2oi1g]

Sir Plz continue this Indo-Greek history.

[@siddhayogi907]

One such opinion is that Chandergupta was 17 years old and studying at Taxilla University, he was introduced to Alexander as future king of Moria empire.

[@arnavchattoraj6335]

Can you a video on historical evidences that Chanakya exists

[@dionisiodussart5629]

Did they really meet ? Seleucos I rather.

[@benefactor4309]

History of austro asiatic tribes

[@user-lp9vz6lu3t]

Alexander and chandragupta never meet its a propaganda to put Alexander as greatest emperor

[@priyanshz67y]

Did Bindusara conquered the lower part of India?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Some parts of the Deccan were already under the Mauryan control. The control of Kalinga is debated. We aren't sure whether Bindusara had control over Kalinga or not.

[@linguistme6870]

Also your assertion in other videos of Yavanas being Greeks always like Yuga Puran and other sources is incorrect as Yavanas were described as Kshtriyas who later turned into Mallecha (combing Brahma Puran and Varah Mihir's Panch Siddantika) . Brahma Puran in chapter 6 says that Yavanas were Kshtriyas whose Dharma was later destroyed while Panch Siddantika says Yavanas were Mallechas so a nuanced iterpretation would actually lead one to have suspicions that Ionians may not be Yonas or Yavanas mentioned .

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

Yavanas word had derived derived from Persian word yona Yona was an Persian province in modern day turkey,inhabited by Greeks Thus yona becomes yavana We have Egyptian word also for yavanas Ashoka uses yona king in his rock edict 1 and 13

[@linguistme6870]

@@ayushkumarsingh3029 I will debunk your arguement using the fact the Yavana word in Vedic Sanskrit language is older as it is used is to describe a former Kshtriya Clan in North western boundaries (most likely Afghanistan region of present day) who later renounced (left) Vedic religion !! Reasoning behind this is as follows Critique to Ionian origin of Yavanas:- For Ionian Greeks word to come to India in language of India there should be merchants / trade from Greeks but as far as my knowledge the was no interactions with Greeks before Alexander around 300 BCE so for the sake of arugement let's add 100- 120 years so Greek interactions started around 420-430 BCE won't it ?? Now Gautam Buddha's date is as conenvetion is 560 BCE to 480 BCE But the earliest evidence of Buddha in literature namely Digha Nikkay and Majjhim Nikkay do talk about Mahabharat as popular text calling it the 5th Brahmanical Text but for Mahabharat but there Yavanas as defined as having one of Kshtriya Tribe origin i.e. having Vedic religion in earlier days even texts earlier than this like Vedangas work use word yavana for the same . So it's more sensible to assume from Yavanas from Sanskrit got transmitted to Pali as Yona . Moreover for the Persians having that word it can be argued they got from Pali and the Greek Ionian Tribe was indepently used. Infact even later texts like Brahma Purana also describe Yavanas origin in the same way I told :) Now regarding the Rock Edict where Yona is mentioned it upto translator's interpretation which you want to follow one can use the INDIAN sources completely to get proper interpretation of what Indians thought or use the cherry picked version like this guy along with his fellow academicians are doing like you can argue layered interpretation but then also no one will ever have consensus on which part is oldest !

[@linguistme6870]

@@ayushkumarsingh3029 Can name your source for Persians having Yona word like name of literature and dating as I don't think it would be earlier than Vedangic timeframe like 900-800 BCE Reasoning for Vedangic Timeperiod is 900 to 800 BCE as Tipitak's oldest section DN 13 by name mentions Changoya Upanishad word spoken by Buddha and at the very least a difference of 7 generations based from composition on the discussion which follows so rougly around 150- 180 years Thus roughly 700 BCE for Chandogya Upanishad but the text itslef mentions the 6 Vedangas by name thus a time period of 900 BCE to 800 BCE is likely period of Vedangas

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

@@linguistme6870 There are hunas also in mahabharta ,this doesn't means in bce indins had connewith hunas Yavanas in mahabharat is a latter addition On origin, Yona was clearly used by Darius 1 as a satrap in his behiustun insc Rc majumdar had also stated in his book age of imperil unity chapter yavanas That yavana word is derived from Persian yauna

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

@@linguistme6870 Behiustun inscription of Darius 1 He listed yauna as one of his satrapies

[@bharathmbasavarajappa2481]

Wow good catch false facts in our history books😊

[@mmm-zd4zd]

This never happened. Stop spreading lies

[@linguistme6870]

yeah the sources he citied for Greeks in Indian accounts are straight out lies for instance he cities Yuga Puran talks about greeks I read the critical edition now that translator uses Greeks for yavanas in his interpretation but based on context things are off like Brahma Puran chpatre 6 says Yavanas were Kshtriyas in older times whose dharma was later destroyed and being described as living somewhere within Bharat . Also Panchsiddhantika do call the Yavanas as Mallech but the commentator of Panch Siddantika also talks about their hindu origin and that they left Vedic Dharma . Either we have to assume that Greeks were earlier Vedic people which is hard to be proved or these Greeks are not Yavanas